Thanks for the info. I'll do some more specific research on video tearing before the next big X11/Wayland fight. =)

One hypothesis could be that it works on your system because some coder put in a heroic effort, and the video is rendered by some ugly mess which bypasses as much of X11 as possible, and cannot be consistently implemented (yes, pure guesswork). Point being: the solution could be a bigger nightmare than the problem, maintenance-wise.

I realise this is easier for me to say - my UID is almost double the length of yours. OTOH we'll get a new gold rush - if there is a new Slashdot (or several), people will have a new chance at getting a low ID.

In any case, it'll be really interesting. If there's a new Slashdot, I'm looking forward to the troll posts.

Second, nobody's arguing for "one size fits all". X11 proponents who point out that Wayland will not be as functional as X11 are pointing out that there are things we use that X11 has that Wayland will ditch.

I'm pretty sure someone does argue for that! Or I at least hope so (tell me if we've read my "fits all" line differently!).

I get the impression you like X11 (to the point of labelling supporters of something else "anti-X11"). X11 currently works for some, doesn't work for others.

The way I see it, X11 has to work for everyone, or be replaced for many sets of users. Currently some users are having problems with running a modern desktop because of it. The only options for a smoother experience are closed source operating systems. Basically, unless X11 can work for everyone, people will create an OSS option.

I have a hard time being convinced by your idea of one-to-one feature replacement. It would basically mean copying a system which is originally from 1984. Even with a rewrite, it's still "keep everything and add more on top". When has including as many old features as possible ever made a project work better? The difference between your optimism here and your pessimism about Wayland's actual code development is pretty stark. In reality, we do not yet know what the result will be.

There comes a point where the different desired features cannot be reconciled: it's probably possible to code a network transparent 4K video display system in principle. However, in practice it will just output junk, even with tomorrow's networks.

So.. WTF is tearing????? And why do I have to lose my network transparency to get rid of it?????

Tearing is when video doesn't look like one picture seamlessly replacing the previous one. It's most obvious when vertical lines are moving horizontally in video: the vertical lines will seem to "dance", with different parts of them moving at visibly different speed (they tremble a bit). It's a problem caused by the horisontal lines of the images being out of synch. Even when it isn't specifically visible, it will make video seem more choppy. It's not bad enough to bother everyone.

I can't give the specific code reason for this: I'm not a coder. However, as I understand it, this problem is tricky or impossible to solve consistently under X11, simply due to complexity and it not being built for showing high-resolution video.

Also supposedly, network transparency puts a lot of demands on the server, so implementing that and modern graphics in the same package is not easy. I don't really know why Wayland lacks integrated network transparency, though. Could be that they just decided to omit it for all I know.

wbr1 writes: It seems abundantly clear now that Dice and the SlashBeta designers do not care one whit about the community here. They do not care about rolling in crapware into sourceforge installers. In short, the only thing that talks to them is money and stupid ideas.

Granted, it takes cash to run sites like these, but they were fine before. The question is, do some of you here want to band together, get whatever is available of slashcode and rebuild this community somewhere else? We can try to make it as it once was, a haven of geeky knowledge and frosty piss, delivered free of charge in a clean community moderated format.

Pretty much anyone who's over the age of 30 who's been involved in software development for any substantial period of time knows that Wayland isn't going to solve it, and that in five years it'll be just as hacky and ugly as X11 is perceived to be - with the added bonus that it won't be anything like as powerful (because by design it won't - I'm serious, they're removing most of X11's core feature set, including the network transparency.)

I think they've realised something that a lot of X11 proponents haven't: that a one-size-fits-all solution won't work anymore.

I'm a desktop Linux user. I am not a sysadmin, and never will be. I have not used network transparency and likely never will.

I use fullscreen video daily, on the other hand. It has tearing. Switching from Ubuntu on a good desktop to Windows on a sucky netbook feels like an improvement video-wise, and that's not how it should be.

The people who have the most to lose from a switch to Wayland are the same people that have the power to choose their own display server. The ones who can't make the switch manually are the same people who will gain from it, on the other hand.

Looking at things from my perspective, I'm glad people are working on a better desktop experience. If anyone wonders why they're ignoring your network transparency...well, that's what a lot of people are doing about better video. There are two camps, and neither has a solution that works for both.

Wind and solar look great if you compare nameplate capacity and ignore the variability. In reality though, getting useful power out of them is pure fantasy unless you have pumped hydro available nearby, and even then it is not competitive.

In reality, there are electricity users that are just fine with following a schedule. You seem to assume that the default everywhere is factories running constantly.

If there's a plant nearby which generates electricity out of thin air, you can bet people will find a use for it. I find the idea of electricity produced during the workday being useless pretty surprising - how could someone *not* find a use for it?

Not a biased piece at all. Never would have thought so with ''slaughter'' in the headline/s

Without commenting on the bias, what word should they use? (I'm assuming that's/sarcasm at the end there)

The dolphins will be killed for meat. The word for killing animals for food is "slaughter". In fact, using that word makes it very clear that they are just animals: the reason it's a strong word when used about human violence is that its meaning then becomes "killed like mere animals".

That story sounds totally believable to me. I used Ganymede as a focusing aid yesterday (mirrorless camera, overwhelmed by Jupiter's brightness). If I can use a planet-sized moon as a focusing aid, I have no problem believing that a guy like that used a bird's eye for telescope testing. : )